|
Message-ID: <813883b9f6ecf4b5e24d77d1b1ec2688@smtp.hushmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 08:36:12 +0100 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: SSHA-512 supported? On 14 Feb, 2013, at 3:26 , Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@...il.com> wrote: > On 13 February 2013 15:06, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote: >> Excerpt: >>> If the left brace ( { ) is the first character of the value that the Salt parameter specifies, then the Loadable Password Algorithm (LPA) uses the name that is specified within the braces ( {} ). A set of salt characters follows the LPA name and ends with a dollar sign ($). The length of the salt character depends on the specified LPA. The following example shows a possible value for the SMD5 LPA that the Salt parameter specifies: >>> {SMD5}JVDbGx8K$ >> >> >> So the same tests written in C should work. Jon, can you compile a trivial C program on that box? I mean, is there a compiler available? >> >> magnum > > > * To generate smd5 password hash compatible to standard salted MD5, > * add the following option line for smd5 stanza. > * lpa_options = std_hash=true > * > * Note : password hash generated with this option won't be compatible with > * hash generated without this option. > * > > It would be interesting to see what format the strings take when this > option is set also. That might give a better version to look for. Yes I saw that in some documentation. I can think of two alternatives with very different outcome: Normal crypt-MD5 and RFC 3112... and I tend to think it's actually the latter. magnum
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.